Why do so many on the left hate success?

That was done under the CRA program. The default rate of loans made under that program were not much different than the default rates of non-CRA loans.

Deregulation that came with little to no risk for the initial loan creators led to a push of "predatory" loans. Some worked out. Others did not. Blaming it on Clinton is pure politics. He was just one part of a monster with many legs.

 

And in all of those 50 years, you never figured out that profits are taxed, and not income?

 

Sure, run with that...
Sorry, Hillary, You And Bill — Not Tax Cuts — Caused The ...

https://www.investors.com › politics › editorials › sorry-hillary-you-and-bi...
Sep 28, 2016 - "We had the worst financial crisis, the Great Recession, the worst since the 1930s. ... former President Bill Clinton, bear for creating the financial crisis. ... for affordable housing, even if that meant buying subprime mortgages.

Clinton Housing Policy Wrecked Economy, Not 1% | Investor's ...

https://www.investors.com › politics › editorials › hillary-and-bill-cause-of...
Apr 15, 2015 - Election '16: With typical gall, Hillary Clinton in her campaign launch lit into "those ... No, that path to destruction was set by Bill Clinton and his social housing policies. ... which used the reports to extort banks for $6 trillion in subprime loan ... The mix of these junk loans made it impossible for investors to tell ...

 

2+2 isn't 35. While the federal bureaucracy has decreased in terms of bodies State local and county regulators have largely replaced them, and the necessity of sorting out precedence is a head that grows daily. And please note based on the ever increasing size of the federal registry the slight decrease In the number of federal bureaucrats seems to have had almost no impact on their ability to write new regulations.

 

Success is so foreign to some people that they call distinguish it from privilege.

 

I am very sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. On high school career day, students asked me about my career. One kid asked me, "How do you stand the pressure." My doctor told me to get a less stressful job." I had a heart attack at age 40. That wasn't fun and I didn't go to work that day. It wasn't all butterflies and roses. But I consider myself a lucky guy. I wish you well.

 

Who ever told you there is a standard of living with the only credential being that you breathe?

Anybody that makes a career at minimum wage had bigger issues than minimum wage. It's just a convenient scape goat.

 

The thing many on the left don't admit, is that for every millionaire made, 100 lost their ass (and savings) trying.

Thousands of people every year cash out 401Ks, invest their savings, risk everything, working long hours on nothing but a dream. They lose it all... often.

The left will point to the few select huge winners that are successful, and claim that they are owed some of that. Ironically, these are never the same people who actually take the risk, especially those that lost.

The people that advocate from the perspective of the left rarely take the risk or have the dream.

 

You are the confused one.
Profits ARE the corporate income, and taxable. That is not the tax being discussed; it is not passed on to consumers.

Revenue from sales is not "income" ; it is "gross sales or revenue" that cost of business are deducted from to arrive at the gross profit. and then net income.

Corporate income tax applies to profit- but excise and other taxes become an expense or cost, and are recovered in the price of goods sold to the consumers- and you pay for them.

 

People that whine against success dont like the fact that successful people WORKED for their success!!!!!! The whiners hate work.

 

^ Legalized theft under the guise of "fairness".
I got news for those types...The fair comes to town once a year and they are late.

Here is the fundemental difference between the left and the right...

The left demands equal outcomes.

The right is about equal opportunities...the outcome is up to you.

 

Thank you for your thoughts and remember that heart attack at 40. lol

 

I'm leaning towards a flat tax, across the board. My brother is a multi millionaire at 40 YO. He built his own screen and aluminum business since he was 19. My dad, is similarly, well set.

Me? Me and my other half live on a fixed income of 1,300 a month. A stroke disabled her in the summer of 2017. I am her sole caretaker. We have lived on our budget for a decade. I leaned on family ONE time in that decade for a 300$ co pay for a major surgery she needed.

Do I begrudge them? No, they made a better path in life, good for them, they earned it. I am not even counting on much of an inheritance. When she passes (she is a good deal older than me and I will only have about what it takes to cremate her) when that day comes (maybe enough to cover expenses for 4 months), I will go to work spraying groves or fabricating, not sit with my hand out, crying "poor me".

 

So, my guess is that your $1,300 of fixed income per month comes from SS disability benefits? You do realize that general conservative attitude is that people on these benefits are moochers that are lazily wasting tax payer's moneys? You should be careful who your friends are.

BTW: Congrats for taking care of your disabled spouse. In my book, that makes you much more of a success in life than Trump, who would dump Melania in a millisecond, should she stop being the pretty trophy wife.

 

The is so much to laugh about in your post. First of all, I have shown a list of bills that the House passed. Most of which are just sitting there in the Senate. So obviously I knew that's where you were going. However, that does not remove the fact that it's a dumb point. Of course there are reasons for the House to not pass bills it knows the Senate won't approve. Your ignorance of the legislative process is astounding. The House often passes bills in a way that they believe the Senate will approve. So that is definitely a factor. But... still... I sent you a list that completely debunks your nonsense. Your attempt at changing the subject is evidence that you know that.

As for the Mueller Report. Interesting how you always show that you know you have been bested by changing the subject. It was fun because all I needed to do to debunk your nonsense was to quote Mueller. But quite a different subject.

Try to stay on topic.

Soooo... now you want the topic to be Corporate Media? Keep trying. If you keep hopping from topic to topic...who knows... one of these days you might even find one out there you have something of interest to say about.

Your continuous attempts at changing the subject every time you are debunked are getting lamer and more obvious every time.

 

wrong. Trade policies which have decimated lower paying jobs in manufacturing and illegal immigration which has imported poverty and increased competition for the lower class (for jobs) has had much of a bigger impact on inequality than tax policies. Taxes don't create poor people, the destruction of jobs via exporting them to cheaper labor supplier Countries and the open border policies has had a huge impact on inequality.

let me dumb it down for you. Imagine you had 50 people in a micro economy. Half are rich and own a few services, manufacturing companies and half are middle class, earning a respectable salary, as many did in 50s-60s in manufacturing.

You have rich and you have middle class.

Now open the borders and let super poor people to come in. Now the inequality has instantly deteriorated, via importing poverty. Now these poor people are willing to work for lower wages than the pre-existing middle class. Guess what, the middle class are displaced and the cheaper labor hired, for bigger profits.

So now you have more poor people (via open border policy) and more unemployed people.

Now change the trade policies. Provide an incentive for the manufacturing and services companies to seek cheaper labor elsewhere. They move half of their manufacturing operations to China and outsource services jobs to India, for half the costs of what pre-exitsing middle class were making. Now guess what, more of the middle class are displaced.

So now you have even more unemployed... that 50 people vibrant micro economy of rich and middle class has instantly turned into more poor, more unemployed and the people at the top making bigger incomes.

These are MUCH bigger problems than tax policies but you all are fixated with taxes as you want to punish those who are more successful than you. You do nothing about open border policies or trade policies which are fueling inequality.

 

Envy.

 

Conclusion: worked better when they were Federal.

 

Except the choice isn't either or. It was one or both.

 

What makes people think that money is the only benefit of success?

 

Yes, the inequality which benefits the wealthy and powerful. But you take your spleen out on people who are not the wealthy and powerful and try to blame the average Joe...You sound like a paid poster for the echo chamber...

 

Sorry, but you're premise is faulty.

Most millionaires are self made? What does self made mean? I was born to two upper middle class parents. I'm not a millionaire, but will be by the barest of definitions due to investments for retirement and property value. I don't own a business or anything like that, I work for the man. My parents paid for my college. They didn't abuse me, they fed me appropriately and took me on vacations and enrolled me in music and sports. They showed up to my concerts and games. So am I self made by your definition? I went to public schools, paid for by tax payers. I use public roads and other services as needed to go about my life.

I think there is no such thing as self made. We created society to further everyone's chances of being successful. So right off the bat, you are making a statement that just isn't true. Hard work alone doesn't make people millionaires. The rich stay rich an the poor stay poor, that's proven by data. So all of those so called self made millionaires had their boot straps well pulled at birth even if it was just having upper middle class, supportive and present parents.

Given you started faulty, it undercuts your entire argument. No one hates success. They hate people who take for themselves at the expense of others without remorse or empathy. And rightfully so. Taking resources you didn't fully earn actually goes against nature. And as a result, it's natural for others to feel that way and then try to undercut you. From simple nepotism (the Trumps) to full on crimes (also the Trumps) earn hatred for GOOD reason. Where as the quiet neighbor who saved and ran a business within the law and took care of his employees and customers as best he/she could earns respect. Will that person pay more in taxes? Sure they will, but they will also get more from society than a poor person will. Any business gets more support and benefit from the government than even someone who has their groceries bought via food stamps. It's waayyyy cheaper to buy food than to build roads and schools. It's wayy cheaper to feed someone than to arm and provide police and fire to protect someone's property.

You need to use data to construct arguments, not feelings.